For other versions of this document, see http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CRS-RL31362 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Order Code RL31362 U.S. Foreign Aid to East and South Asia: Selected Recipients Updated October 8, 2008 Thomas Lum Specialist in Asian Affairs Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division U.S. Foreign Aid to East and South Asia: Selected Recipients Summary This report analyzes annual budget justifications and legislation for foreign operations appropriations and discusses U.S. foreign aid trends, programs, and restrictions in 16 East Asian and South Asian countries. It does not cover aid to Pacific Island nations, North Korea, and Afghanistan. Country tables do not include assistance from U.S. State Department programs funded outside the foreign operations budget, such as educational and cultural exchange programs, and assistance from other departments and agencies. Since the war on terrorism began in 2001 and the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) and Global HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI) were launched in 2004, the United States has increased foreign aid spending dramatically in some regions, including East and South Asia. The United States has raised military, economic, and development assistance primarily for counterterrorism objectives in the East Asia- Pacific (EAP) and South Asia regions, with Pakistan, India, the Philippines, and Indonesia receiving the bulk of the increases. In 2007, the Bush Administration restructured U.S. foreign aid programs to better serve the goal of transformational development, which places greater emphasis on U.S. security and democracy building as the chief goals of foreign aid. In the past decade, the United States government has restricted foreign assistance to many countries in East and South Asia in order to encourage democracy and respect for human rights. Some sanctions have been waived or lifted. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2008 (P.L. 110-161) placed human rights conditions upon portions of the U.S. military assistance grants to Indonesia, the Philippines, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. Since 2003, President Bush has annually exercised the waiver authority on coup-related sanctions against Pakistan. In 2005, the United States government resumed full military assistance to Indonesia, based upon the satisfaction of legislative conditions and national security grounds. The FY2008 budget for the East Asian countries that are covered in this report represented a slight increase compared to FY2007. The FY2008 budget raised assistance to South Asian countries by 8%, according to estimates. In September 2008, the House and Senate passed the continuing resolution (CR), H.R. 2638 (Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009). The bill was signed into law as P.L. 110-329. The House and Senate approved $36.6 billion and $36.7 billion, respectively, for Department of State and Foreign Operations in FY2009, compared to $32.8 billion enacted in FY2008. The CR for FY2009 continues most funding through March 6, 2009, at FY2008 levels. This report will be updated periodically. Contents Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 New Approaches to Foreign Aid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Critiques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Funding Trends . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Foreign Aid Restrictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 The FY2008 and FY2009 Budgets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Regional Comparisons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 East Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Taiwan and Singapore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Foreign Aid Restrictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Lifting Sanctions on Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 September 2006 Military Coup in Thailand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Chinese Aid to Southeast Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Country Aid Levels and Restrictions -- East Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Burma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Cambodia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 People's Republic of China (PRC) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 East Timor (Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Indonesia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Resumption of Military Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 2004 Tsunami Relief . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Laos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Malaysia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Mongolia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Philippines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Thailand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 September 2006 Military Coup and U.S. Aid Sanctions . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Other Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Vietnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 South Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Foreign Aid Restrictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Disaster Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Country Aid Levels and Restrictions -- South Asia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Bangladesh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Nepal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Pakistan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Lifting of Foreign Aid Restrictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Sri Lanka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 FY2008 Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Appendix. Selected Acronyms for U.S. Foreign Aid Accounts and Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 List of Figures Figure 1. Major U.S. Aid Recipients in Asia, by Aid Amount, 2001-2007 . . . . . 3 Figure 2. Health and Development Assistance (DA and CSH) by Region, FY2007 est. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Figure 3. Economic Support Funds by Region, FY2007 est. ($million) . . . . . . . 7 Figure 4. Military Assistance by Region, FY2007 est. ($million) . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Figure 5. U.S. Foreign Aid (Non-food) to East Asian Countries, FY2007 est. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Figure 6. Top U.S. Foreign Aid Recipients in East Asia, FY2000, FY2002-FY2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Figure 7. U.S. Assistance to South Asian Countries (excluding Food Aid), 2001-2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 List of Tables Table 1. U.S. Foreign Assistance by Region (Excluding Food Aid), 2001, 2003-2007 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Table 2. U.S. Assistance to Burma, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Table 3. U.S. Assistance to Cambodia, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Table 4. U.S. Assistance to China, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Table 5. U.S. Assistance to East Timor, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Table 6. U.S. Assistance to Indonesia, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Table 7. U.S. Assistance to Laos (LPDR), 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Table 8. U.S. Assistance to Malaysia, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Table 9. U.S. Assistance to Mongolia, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Table 10. U.S. Assistance to Philippines, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Table 11. U.S. Assistance to Thailand, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Table 12. U.S. Assistance to Vietnam, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Table 13. U.S. Assistance to Bangladesh, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Table 14. U.S. Assistance to India, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Table 15. U.S. Assistance to Nepal, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Table 16. U.S. Assistance to Pakistan, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 Table 17. U.S. Assistance to Sri Lanka, 2005-2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 U.S. Foreign Aid to East and South Asia: Selected Recipients Overview New Approaches to Foreign Aid The United States acts to advance U.S. foreign policy and national security goals and respond to global development and humanitarian needs through its foreign assistance programs. Following the September 2001 terrorist attacks, foreign aid gained importance as a "vital cornerstone," along with diplomacy and defense, in U.S. national security strategy.1 The Bush Administration reoriented foreign assistance programs, particularly to "front line" states in the war on terrorism. For many countries, the U.S. government directed not only increased security and military assistance but also development aid for counterterrorism efforts, including programs aimed at mitigating conditions that may make radical ideologies and religious extremism attractive, such as cycles of violence, poverty, limited educational opportunities, and ineffective or unaccountable governance. In 2007, the Bush Administration restructured U.S. foreign aid programs to better serve the goal of transformational development, which places greater emphasis on U.S. security and democracy building as the principal goals of foreign aid.2 Toward these ends, the new Strategic Framework for U.S. Foreign Assistance divides aid programming among five objectives: peace and security; governing justly and democratically; investing in people; economic growth; and humanitarian assistance. The Millennium Challenge Account (MCA), established in 2004, promotes these objectives by rewarding countries that demonstrate good governance, investment in health and education, and sound economic policies. Critiques. According to some analysts, recent U.S. foreign policy trends have weakened programs and institutions that specialize in basic development. Some policy-makers have expressed concern that transformational development and MCA funding priorities have taken resources away from traditional programs, particularly in countries that contain lesser security threats to the United States or where governments do not meet various U.S. performance criteria. Other analysts argue 1 See CRS Report RL33491, Restructuring U.S. Foreign Aid: The Role of the Director of Foreign Assistance in Transformational Development, by Larry Nowels and Connie Veillette. 2 Transformational development, which involves foreign aid, is to work in tandem with the Administration's transformational diplomacy, which emphasizes diplomatic resources. See USAID Fact Sheet, "New Direction for U.S. Foreign Assistance," January 19, 2006. CRS-2 that promoting democracy in some countries prematurely may result in a waste of aid.3 According to one study, insufficient funding for foreign assistance objectives has reinforced a "migration of foreign aid authorities and functions to the Department of Defense."4 Funding Trends Foreign operations appropriations declined from a peak in 1985 to a low in 1997, after which they began to grow again. Many of the fluctuations in aid flows over the past 25 years can be attributed to U.S. foreign policy responses to events such as natural disasters, humanitarian crises, and wars and to U.S. military assistance and other security initiatives in the Middle East. Since 2001, U.S. assistance to front line states in the global war on terrorism and Iraq war-related funding have propelled foreign aid funding to new highs. Other sources of growth include the Millennium Challenge Account (MCA) and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR).5 Four Asia-Pacific countries are eligible to apply for MCA assistance -- East Timor, Mongolia, Sri Lanka, and Vanuatu -- while two countries -- Indonesia and the Philippines -- have been designated as "threshold," qualifying them for assistance to help them become eligible for MCA funds. In October 2007, the Mongolian government and the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) signed a five-year, $285 million agreement. Vietnam is the largest Asian recipient of Global HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI) funding under PEPFAR ($118 million between 2005 and 2007). The war on terrorism has reoriented foreign assistance priorities in Asia and accelerated a trend toward increased aid to the region that began in 2000. Throughout the 1990s, U.S. assistance to Asia fell due to the ebbing of Cold War security concerns, nuclear proliferation sanctions, and favorable economic and political trends. For example, the withdrawal of U.S. military forces from the Philippines, nuclear proliferation and other sanctions against Pakistan, and the reduced need for economic assistance, particularly in Southeast Asia, contributed to declines in U.S. aid levels. The Asian financial crisis of 1997-98 reversed the downward trend, as USAID funded a regional economic recovery program for Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand, and Vietnam. Since the war on terrorism began in 2001, Pakistan, India, the Philippines, and Indonesia became the foci of the Bush Administration's counterterrorism efforts in South and Southeast Asia, due to their strategic importance, large Muslim populations, and insurgency movements with links to terrorist groups. These 3 Marcela Sanchez, "A Risky Shift in Direction," South Florida Sun-Sentinel, January 27, 2006; Guy Dinmore, "U.S. Poised for Radical Reform of Foreign Aid Programme," Financial Times, January 19, 2006; Guy Dinmore, "Critics of `Utopian' Foreign Policy Fail to Weaken Bush Resolve," Financial Times, January 13, 2006. 4 Embassies Grapple to Guide Foreign Aid: A Report to Members of the Committee on Foreign Relations, United States Senate Committee Print, November 16, 2007. 5 CRS Report RL33262, Foreign Policy Budget Trends: A Thirty-Year Review, by Larry Nowels. CRS-3 countries have received the bulk of the increases in U.S. foreign aid (non-food) to Asia (excluding Afghanistan), although funding for aid programs in India and the Philippines reached a peak in 2006 and fell in 2007 and 2008. Beginning in 2004, both Indonesia and the Philippines received new funding for education programs in order to promote diversity, non-violent resolution of social and political conflict (Indonesia), and livelihood skills among Muslims residing in impoverished and conflict-ridden areas (southern Philippines). See Figure 1. Figure 1. Major U.S. Aid Recipients in Asia, by Aid Amount, 2001-2007 ($million) Both the Bush Administration and Congress have supported increased funding for the Department of State's Human Rights and Democracy Fund (HRDF). Spending for HRDF increased from a yearly average of $13 million in 2001-2002 to $31 million in 2003-2005. The Fund received $71 million in both FY2006 and FY2007. In addition, the U.S. government provided a total of $65 million for National Endowment for Democracy (NED)-administered HRDF programs between 2003 and 2007. Approximately one-third of the Democracy Fund has been allocated to Asia, mostly for rule of law and civil society programs in China.6 6 The Human Rights and Democracy Fund, administered by the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor (DRL) of the Department of State, was established by the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, FY2003 (P.L. 107-228). CRS-4 Foreign Aid Restrictions In the past decade, the United States has imposed restrictions on non- humanitarian development aid, Economic Support Funds (ESF),7 and military assistance to some Asian countries in order to pressure them to improve performance related to democracy, human rights, weapons proliferation, foreign debt payments, and other areas. These countries include Burma, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Thailand, and Pakistan. However, the United States continues to fund non- governmental organizations (NGOs) that run development and democracy programs in some of these countries. Most sanctions on aid to Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand, and Pakistan have been lifted. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2008 placed human rights conditions upon portions of the U.S. military assistance grants to Indonesia, the Philippines, and Pakistan. The FY2008 and FY2009 Budgets The Administration's FY2008 budget request for the East Asian countries that are covered in this report ($453 million) represented a slight increase compared to FY2007 ($442 million). With the exception of Indonesia and Vietnam, assistance to most East Asian countries is to decrease or remain about the same in 2008 compared to 2007. The budget request for Indonesia included large increases in Development Assistance (DA) and Foreign Military Financing (FMF). Global HIV/AIDS Initiative funding for Vietnam is to grow by 36% in FY2008, from $63 million in FY2007 to $86 million. The FY2008 budget raised assistance to South Asian countries by 8% (from $900 million in FY2007 to $974 million). This reflected greater funding for Bangladesh (mostly Development Assistance) and Pakistan (ESF). In addition, for FY2008, the Administration requested new funding for law enforcement enhancement activities in Nepal and Sri Lanka. Regional Development Mission Asia programs (an estimated $13.7 million in FY2008) support public health efforts, improved water and sanitation services, trade, environmental preservation, and investments in energy efficiency, renewable energy, and clean technologies in East and South Asia. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2008 (H.R. 2764, signed into law as P.L. 110-161), Division J, made some changes to the Administration's request. These revisions included additional ESF for democracy and humanitarian activities for Burma; funding for democracy, rule of law, and Tibet programs in China as well as U.S.-China educational exchanges; and increased FMF for the Philippines. The spending measure also imposed new restrictions on FMF for Sri Lanka. 7 Economic Support Funds (ESF) programs involve a wide range of uses (except military) that support U.S. security interests and promote economic and political stability in the recipient countries and regions. CRS-5 FY2009 Continuing Resolution The House and Senate passed the continuing resolution (CR), H.R. 2638 (Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009), on September 24, 2008 and September 27, 2008, respectively. The bill was signed into law as P.L. 110-329. The House and Senate approved $36.6 billion and $36.7 billion, respectively, for Department of State and Foreign Operations in FY2009, compared to $32.8 billion enacted in FY2008. The CR for FY2009 continues most funding through March 6, 2009, at FY2008 levels. For further information, see CRS Report RL34552, State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs: FY2009 Appropriations, by Susan B. Epstein and Kennon H. Nakamura. Table 1. U.S. Foreign Assistance by Region (Excluding Food Aid), 2001, 2003-2007 ($million) FY2001 FY2003 FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 Africa 1,313 1,706 2,091 2,795 2,771 3,486 East Asia- 368 477 474 525 1,022 500 Pacific Europe and 2,017 2,871 1,577 1,323 1,023 845 Eurasia Near East Asia 5,401 8,409 5,556 5,755 5,217 5,099 (Middle East) South/Central Asia (excl. 201 785 685 970 875 1,025 Afghanistan) Western 749 1,559 1,545 1,723 1,516 1,439 Hemisphere Totals 10,049 15,807 11,928 13,091 12,424 12,394 Source: U.S. Department of State, Country/Account Summaries (2001-2007). Note: In addition to the above, USAID administers emergency and humanitarian food assistance pursuant to P.L. 480, Title II (the Agricultural Trade Development Act of 1954, as amended). USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS) administers P.L. 480, Title I -- sales of agricultural commodities under concessional or favorable credit terms, Food for Progress programs (Food for Progress Act of 1985), Food for Education (Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002), and Section 416(b) (Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended) -- donation of surplus commodities. CRS-6 Regional Comparisons Africa remained the largest regional recipient of Child Survival and Health (CSH) and Development Assistance (DA) funding in FY2007.8 The largest regional recipients of Economic Support Funds in FY2007 were Near East Asia (Middle East) and South and Central Asia (mostly to Afghanistan, with a large portion going to Pakistan as well). The largest recipient of military assistance, by far, was Near East Asia followed by South and Central Asia.9 These rankings were the same as those for FY2006. See Table 1 and Figures 2-4. Figure 2. Health and Development Assistance (DA and CSH) by Region, FY2007 est. ($million) 8 The State Department divides foreign aid allocations into six regions: Africa, East Asia and the Pacific (EAP), Europe and Eurasia, Near East Asia (Middle East), South and Central Asia (formerly South Asia), and Western Hemisphere (Latin America and Carribean). 9 Military assistance includes International Military Education and Training (IMET), Foreign Military Financing (FMF), and Peacekeeping Operations (PKO). CRS-7 Figure 3. Economic Support Funds by Region, FY2007 est. ($million) Source: U.S. Department of State. Figure 4. Military Assistance by Region, FY2007 est. ($million) Source: U.S. Department of State. CRS-8 East Asia Since 2001, foreign aid spending in East Asia has grown markedly, largely due to counterterrorism efforts in the Philippines and Indonesia. The Philippines, a Major Non-NATO Ally, and Indonesia, a democratizing nation with the world's largest Muslim population, are home to several insurgency movements and radical Islamist organizations, some with ties to Al Qaeda, such as the Abu Sayyaf Group (Philippines) and Jemaah Islamiyah (Indonesia). USAID's programs in East Asia also aim to address the conditions that may give rise to radical ideologies and terrorism, such as poverty and unemployment, lack of education, failing governments, political disenfranchisement, and violent conflict. In October 2003, the Bush Administration launched education programs in Muslim communities in the Philippines and in Indonesia as part of its regional counterterrorism efforts. Among East Asia and the Pacific (EAP) countries (excluding the Pacific Island nations),10 in FY2007, Indonesia was the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, particularly ESF, health, and development assistance (CSH and DA), followed by the Philippines. The Philippines was the region's largest beneficiary of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) and International Military Education and Training (IMET). Counter-narcotics and law enforcement assistance (INCLE) were provided to Indonesia, the Philippines, Laos, and Thailand. Indonesia, Cambodia, and the Philippines were the largest recipients of Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, De- mining, and Related Programs (NADR).11 Vietnam, as one of 15 focus countries under the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), received $118 million from the Global HIV/AIDS Initiative (GHAI) account between 2005 and 2007 and is to receive $86 million in 2008. See Figures 5 and 6. 10 For information on U.S. foreign assistance to the Pacific Island countries, see CRS Report RL34086, The Southwest Pacific: U.S. Interests and China's Growing Influence, by Thomas Lum and Bruce Vaughn. 11 The INCLE and NADR accounts are often referred to as "security assistance." CRS-9 Figure 5. U.S. Foreign Aid (Non-food) to East Asian Countries, FY2007 est. ($million) Source: U.S. Department of State. U.S. assistance also finances several EAP regional programs. Estimated funding for such programs in FY2007 was $27 million, a slight decrease from that provided in FY2006. Most of the funding -- approximately 75% -- supports economic growth efforts. In addition, the United States contributes to the Developing Asian Institutions Fund as part of the establishment of a Free Trade Area of the Asia- Pacific. The second largest regional aid objective is the advancement of peace and security (nearly 20% of regional program funding), including the following aid activities: counterterrorism, counternarcotics, fighting transnational crime, non- proliferation, and maritime cooperation. The third largest aid area is democracy- building. Taiwan and Singapore. Taiwan and Singapore, two newly developed countries in East Asia, also receive limited U.S. assistance. Taiwan receives over $550,000 annually to develop its export control system and combat trafficking in persons. The United States government provides Singapore roughly $700,000 per year to help the country deter, detect, and interdict the flow of illegal arms across its maritime borders. CRS-10 Foreign Aid Restrictions In some East Asian countries, the United States has withheld assistance or restricted it to non-governmental organizations (NGOs) or to exiled democratic political groups in response to government actions that the U.S. government has deemed in violation of international human rights standards. In the past decade, foreign operations appropriations measures have imposed human rights-related sanctions on U.S. foreign assistance to the governments of Burma, Cambodia, and Thailand and to the Indonesian military while supporting Burmese dissident groups and promoting human rights, civil society, and democracy in Cambodia, China, East Timor, Indonesia, Mongolia, and elsewhere. Since 2006, most sanctions on aid to the governments of Cambodia and Thailand and to the Indonesian military have been lifted. Figure 6. Top U.S. Foreign Aid Recipients in East Asia, FY2000, FY2002-FY2007 ($million) Source: U.S. Department of State. Lifting Sanctions on Indonesia. Between 1993 and 2005, Indonesia faced sanctions on military assistance largely due to U.S. congressional concerns about human rights violations, particularly those committed by Indonesian military forces (TNI). In February 2005, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice determined that the Indonesian government and armed forces (TNI) had satisfied legislative conditions and certified the resumption of full IMET for Indonesia. P.L. 109-102, Section 599F(a), continued existing restrictions on FMF, stating that such assistance may be made available for Indonesia only if the Secretary of State certifies that the Indonesian government is prosecuting, punishing, and resolving cases involving members of the TNI credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of human rights in East Timor and elsewhere. Section 599F(b) provided that the Secretary of State may waive restrictions on FMF for Indonesia if such action would be in the national security interests of the United States. In November 2005, the Secretary of State waived restrictions on FMF to Indonesia on national security grounds pursuant to Section 599F(b). CRS-11 September 2006 Military Coup in Thailand. In response to the September 19, 2006, military coup in Thailand, the Bush Administration suspended military and peacekeeping assistance pursuant to Section 508 of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, which provides that such funds shall not be made available to any country whose duly elected head of government was deposed by military coup. The U.S. government also suspended funding for counter-terrorism assistance provided under Section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2006. Other aid programs not affected by Section 508 or in the U.S. national interest continued to receive funding. In February 2008, the United States resumed security and military assistance to Thailand following the holding of democratic elections. Chinese Aid to Southeast Asia In comparison to major bilateral donors in the region, the People's Republic of China (PRC) provides relatively little official development assistance (ODA). Furthermore, the PRC government appears to lack a foreign aid system with a centralized organizational structure, long-term development goals, open funding processes, and published data. Nonetheless, the PRC administers a wide range of economic assistance to Southeast Asia that includes many forms of aid that generally are not counted as ODA by established international aid agencies: infrastructure and public works projects, trade and investment agreements, pledges of foreign direct investment, and technical assistance. China is also a large source of loans. According to some analysts, when these kinds of assistance are included, China is one of the largest bilateral aid donors in Southeast Asia. The PRC has been described as the "primary economic patron" of the region's least developed countries (Burma, Cambodia, and Laos).12 China also has provided considerable foreign aid to Vietnam as well as other large and more developed countries (Thailand, Indonesia, and the Philippines). Some analysts have criticized PRC assistance and investments for being non- transparent, supporting urban "trophy projects" rather than sustainable development, and lacking performance criteria and environmental safeguards. Others have argued that the benefits of PRC assistance to these countries, particularly Cambodia and Laos, have outweighed adverse effects, and that China has helped to address needs not met by Western and Japanese aid. Many observers argue that the United States should bolster its aid programs, trade activities, and diplomatic presence in the region in order to counteract China's growing influence.13 12 Catherin E. Dalpino, "Consequences of a Growing China," Statement before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs, June 7, 2005; Heritage Foundation program, "Southeast Asia's Forgotten Tier: Burma, Cambodia and Laos," July 26, 2007. 13 For further information, see CRS Report RL34620, Comparing Global Influence: China's and U.S. Diplomacy, Foreign Aid, Trade, and Investment in the Developing World, coordinated by Thomas Lum. CRS-12 Country Aid Levels and Restrictions -- East Asia14 Burma Table 2. U.S. Assistance to Burma, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 0 0 2,100 2,083 2,100 DA 0 0 0 717 0 ESF 7,936 10,890 10,890 12,895b 13,750 Othera 4,000 3,000 3,000 3,000b -- Totals 11,936 13,890 15,990 18,695 15,850 Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID. a. Humanitarian assistance for displaced Burmese and host communities in Thailand through an unspecified account. b. P.L. 110-161 Burma's political, economic, educational, and public health institutions and systems have deteriorated under 40 years of military rule. The United States provides no direct aid to the Burmese government in response to the Burmese military junta's (State Peace and Development Council or SPDC) repression of the National League for Democracy (NLD), failure to honor the NLD's parliamentary victory in 1990, and harassment of its leader, Aung San Suu Kyi, who remains under house arrest.15 U.S. sanctions were tightened, especially travel and financial restrictions against SPDC leaders, following the Burmese government's violent suppression of democracy demonstrators in September 2007. On June 11, 2003, the 108th Congress passed the Burmese Freedom and Democracy Act of Top Donors of Bilateral 2003 (P.L. 108-61), which bans imports from Official Development Burma unless democracy is restored. Additional Assistance ($US million) U.S. foreign aid sanctions against Burma include to Burma opposition to international bank loans to Burma and a ban on debt restructuring assistance. Since 1. Japan: 26 2. EC: 14 the Office to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in 3. United Kingdom: 11 Persons was established by the U.S. State 4. Australia: 11 Department in 2001, Burma has received a "Tier 5. Korea: 7 3" assessment annually by the Office for failing to make significant efforts to bring itself into 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD compliance with the minimum standards for the 14 Including Southeast Asia and excluding North Korea and Pacific Island nations. 15 For Burma aid sanctions, see P.L. 104-208, Section 570. For further information on Burma, see CRS Report RS22737, Burma: Economic Sanctions, by Larry A. Niksch and Martin A. Weiss. CRS-13 elimination of trafficking in persons. The Tier 3 ranking could serve as a basis for withholding non-humanitarian aid. Inside Burma, the United States provides assistance for HIV/AIDS prevention, care, and treatment, English language training, and civil society. The largest U.S. aid programs assist Burmese refugees in Thailand. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2008 (P.L. 110-161) appropriated $13 million (ESF) primarily for Burmese student groups and other democratic organizations located outside Burma, and for the provision of humanitarian assistance to displaced Burmese along Burma's borders. The act also provides $3 million for community-based organizations operating in Thailand to provide food, medical and other humanitarian assistance to internally displaced persons in eastern Burma. Cambodia Table 3. U.S. Assistance to Cambodia, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 29,300 28,556 27,826 27,826 23,135 DA 8,950 5,483 7,922 8,087 17,226 ESF 16,864 14,850 14,850 14,879 -- FMF 992 990 990 198 750 GHAI 0 0 1,600 -- -- IMET 0 54 101 67 60 INCLE 0 0 0 0 0 NADR 4,170 5,000 3,987 3,937 4,200 Peace Corps 0 0 0 1,379 -- Totals 60,276 54,933 57,276 56,373 45,371 Food Aid P.L. 480 Title 0 0 0 0 0 II Granta FFPb 3,643 0 0 -- -- FFEb 0 1,257 2,373 -- -- Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID; U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. b. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. Cambodia ranks 131st out of 177 countries and regions on the United Nations Development Program's Human Development Index, which measures GNP per capita, life expectancy, and educational attainment. The U.S. State Department reports that Cambodia's fragile institutions, weak rule of law, and rampant corruption are major challenges to Cambodia's democratic development and economic growth. Furthermore, Cambodia's health and education systems were decimated under the CRS-14 rule of the Khmer Rouge (1975-1979) and subsequent Vietnamese control.16 The largest U.S. assistance sectors in Cambodia are health and education ($25 million), including a significant HIV/AIDS program component. The U.S. assistance mission in Cambodia also aims to promote transparency and accountability in government, combat corruption, and strengthen civil society. Other program areas include economic reform and growth and improving the military's capability to protect Cambodia's borders from transnational threats. In February 2007, the United States government lifted a decade-long ban on direct bilateral aid to Cambodia. The U.S. government had imposed restrictions on foreign assistance to Cambodia following Prime Minister Hun Sen's unlawful seizure of power in 1997 and in response to other abuses of power under his rule. Foreign operations appropriations barred U.S. assistance to the central government of Cambodia and to the Khmer Rouge tribunal and instructed U.S. representatives to international financial institutions to oppose loans to Cambodia, except those that met basic human needs. U.S. assistance was permitted only to Cambodian and foreign NGOs and to local governments. Statutory exceptions allowed for the following categories of U.S. assistance to the central government of Cambodia: reproductive and maternal and child health care; basic education; combating human trafficking; cultural and historic preservation; the prevention, treatment, and control of HIV/AIDS and other infectious diseases; and counter-narcotics activities.17 Cambodia, one of the top five countries in the world for the number of landmine casualties Top Donors of Bilateral (approximately 800 victims per year), received Official Development $5 million 2006 and an estimated $3.8 million in Assistance ($US million) to 2007 in U.S. de-mining assistance. Under the Cambodia Administration's FY2008 budget, the country is to receive $2.5 million in de-mining assistance. 1. Japan: 94 2. United States: 60 In addition, in the past decade, USAID has 3. France: 28 supported programs worth $13 million providing 4. Australia: 27 for prostheses, physical rehabilitation, 5. Germany: 24 employment, and related services for mine victims using Leahy War Victims Funds. 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD On October 12, 2005, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Michael Leavitt, on a visit to Southeast Asia, signed a cooperation agreement with Cambodian officials in which $1.8 million was pledged to help the country guard against the spread of H5N1 (avian influenza). In January 2007, the Peace Corps launched programs in Cambodia to teach English and develop sustainable community activities. 16 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY2008. 17 For most of these activities, the U.S. government collaborated with the central government of Cambodia but continued to provide funding through the country's large and vibrant NGO community. CRS-15 People's Republic of China (PRC)18 Table 4. U.S. Assistance to China, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 0 0 4,800 4,960 5,000 DA 0 4,950 5,000 9,919a -- a ESF 19,000 20,000 19,000 15,000 -- a ESF/Tibet 4,216 3,960 3,960 4,712 1,400 GHAI 0 0 1,950 0 0 NADR 0 0 0 0 600 Peace Corps 1,476 1,683 1,886 1,953 -- Totals 24,692 21,683 36,596 36,544 7,000 Sources: U.S. Department of State, USAID (Congressional Notification, August 14, 2008). a. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2008 (P.L. 110-161) authorized $10 million for U.S.- China educational exchanges (DA), $15 million for China/Hong Kong/Taiwan democracy programs (ESF), and $5.25 million for Tibetan community assistance (ESF). USAID does not have a presence or mission in the People's Republic of China (PRC). However, the Peace Corps has been involved in English language and environmental education in China since 1993, and United States funding primarily to U.S.-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs) for democracy and Tibet programs has grown substantially since 2002 (approximately $15 million per year). China received only Peace Corps assistance prior to 2000. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2000 provided $1 million for foreign-based NGOs working in Tibet and authorized ESF for foreign NGOs to promote democracy in China. For FY2001, the United States extended $28 million to the PRC as compensation for damages caused by the accidental NATO bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade in 1999. Congress has increased its annual appropriation for democracy, human rights, and rule of law programs in China from $10 million in 2002 to $23 million in 2006.19 Appropriations for cultural preservation, economic development, and environmental conservation in Tibetan communities in China have also grown. In 2004, the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor (DRL) of the Department of State became the principal administrator of China democracy 18 Since 2004, the annual congressional authorization for democracy funds for China have included Hong Kong and Taiwan. Funding for legal and political reforms in Taiwan shall only be made available to the extent that they are matched from sources other than the United States Government. 19 For further information, see CRS Report RS22663, U.S.-Funded Assistance Programs in China, by Thomas Lum. CRS-16 programs.20 Major U.S. grantees have included the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), the Asia Foundation, Temple University (School of Law), the American Bar Association, and the Bridge Fund (Tibet). In addition, NED provides grants (approximately $2 million per year since 1999) for programs that promote human rights, labor rights, electoral and legal reforms, and independent mass media in China from its annual congressional appropriation.21 Since 2006, Congress has appropriated Development Assistance (DA) to American Top Donors of Bilateral educational institutions for exchange programs Official Development related to democracy, rule of law, and the Assistance ($US million) to environment in China. In 2007, the U.S. China government began funding HIV/AIDS programs in China. 1. Japan: 1,662 2. Germany: 470 3. France: 164 The United States continues to impose other 4. United Kingdom: 74 restrictions that were put in place in the 5. EC: 58 aftermath of the 1989 Tiananmen Square military crackdown, including "no" votes or 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD abstentions by U.S. representatives to international financial institutions regarding loans to China (except those that meet basic human needs) and a ban on Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC) programs in the PRC. The Foreign Operations Appropriations Act for FY2002 (P.L. 107-115) lifted the restrictions (effective since FY2000) requiring that ESF for China democracy programs be provided only to NGOs located outside the PRC. However, Tibet programs are still restricted to NGOs. Congress continues to require that U.S. representatives to international financial institutions support projects in Tibet only if they do not encourage the migration and settlement of non-Tibetans (Han Chinese) into Tibet or the transfer of Tibetan-owned properties to non-Tibetans.22 In addition, foreign operations appropriations legislation forbids funding to the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) for programs in China due to alleged coercive family planning practices. 20 For descriptions of HRDF projects in China, see U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor, FY2005-2006 Human Rights and Democracy Fund Projects Fact Sheet, December 6, 2005. 21 See General Accounting Office, "Foreign Assistance: U.S. Funding for Democracy- Related Programs (China)," February 2004. 22 For further information, see CRS Report RL31910, China: Economic Sanctions, by Dianne E. Rennack. CRS-17 East Timor (Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste) Table 5. U.S. Assistance to East Timor, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 0 0 1,000 1,000 0 DA 500 0 0 5,000 8,140 ESF 21,824 18,810 18,810 16,862 -- FMF 1,023 990 475 0 0 IMET 364 193 254 381 300 INCLE 0 1,485 0 20 1,010 PKO 1,228 0 0 0 0 Peace Corps 1,372 827 0 0 -- Totals 25,811 22,305 20,539 23,263 9,450 Food Aid P.L. 480 Title 994 1,182 2,172 0 0 II Granta Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID; U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. East Timor (Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste) gained full independence in May Top Donors of Bilateral 2002. The United States supports a wide range Official Development of aid programs in East Timor, one of Asia's Assistance ($US million) to poorest countries, with the goal of building a East Timor viable economy, functional government, and democratic political system. The largest 1. Australia: 37 2. Portugal: 30 strategic objective of U.S. assistance is 3. United States: 24 economic growth, targeting agriculture, private 4. Japan: 22 sector competitiveness, and economic 5. EC: 11 opportunity. Other major objectives are improved governance and peace and security. 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD Program areas include rule of law, human rights, and civil society. IMET activities aim to develop more professional military and police forces. In November 2005, the Millennium Challenge Corporation selected East Timor as eligible for MCA assistance. In May 2006, the Peace Corps suspended its programs in East Timor due to civil and political unrest in the country. CRS-18 Indonesia Table 6. U.S. Assistance to Indonesia, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 37,100 28,017 27,507 25,737 30,883 DA 27,848 33,199 29,524 70,953 122,021 ESF 68,480 69,300 69,300 64,474 -- FMF 0 990 6,175 15,572 15,700 GHAI 0 0 250 -- -- IMET 728 938 1,398 927 1,500 INCLE 0 4,950 4,700 6,150 9,450 NADR 6,262 6,888 8,881 5,861 6,750 Totals 140,418 144,282 147,321 189,674 186,304 Food Aid/Disaster Relief P.L. 480 Title 10,489 12,886 10,951 0 0 II Granta FFPb 6,194 0 0 -- -- b Section 416(b) 9,078 0 0 -- -- Tsunami 400,000 -- -- -- -- Reliefc Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID; U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. b. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. c. Tsunami Recovery and Reconstruction Fund, P.L. 109-13 The U.S. State Department reports that the "overarching U.S. foreign policy priority in Indonesia is to assist its transformation into a stable, moderate democracy capable of addressing regional and global challenges in partnership with the international community." The country faces many development and security challenges, including terrorist threats, ethnic and separatist conflicts, weak institutions, high levels of corruption, poverty and unemployment, low levels of education, and poor health conditions.23 The largest strategic objective in terms of funding is investing in people ($87.6 million), which includes education, health, and clean water programs. A major U.S. assistance initiative is the six-year, $157 million education program that began in 2004. The second largest area of U.S. aid is peace and security -- the Administration requested $41.7 million for FY2008 for the Indonesian military and police to fight terrorism, combat weapons proliferation and other transnational crimes, monitor strategic waterways, and cooperate with the United States armed forces. This increase in funding reflects the normalization of military ties in 2005. For FY2008, over $29 million in U.S. assistance are to support programs for strengthening the justice and legislative branches, participatory governance, human 23 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY2008. CRS-19 rights, and civil society. Economic growth programs worth $27 million are to promote greater transparency and combat corruption, and are expected to lead to an improved trade and investment climate, financial sector soundness, and increased private sector competitiveness. The MCC has designated Indonesia as a "threshold" country for 2006, meaning that the country is close to meeting MCA criteria and may receive assistance in reaching eligibility status. In November 2006, USAID and the government of Indonesia signed a $55 million, two-year agreement for MCA assistance under the MCC Threshold Program. Resumption of Military Assistance. In 2005, the Bush Administration determined that Indonesia had met legislative conditions for the resumption of full IMET and waived restrictions on FMF on national security grounds, thus lifting sanctions on military assistance that were first imposed in 1993.24 The Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2004 (P.L. 108-199) made IMET available to Indonesia if the Secretary of State determined that the Indonesian government and armed forces (TNI) were cooperating with the United States in the investigation regarding the August 2002 attack in Timika, Papua, in which three school teachers, including two Americans, were killed. P.L. 108-199 continued the ban on FMF unless the President certified that the Indonesian government was prosecuting and punishing those members of the Indonesia armed forces credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of human rights, particularly in East Timor in 1999. The FY2005 foreign operations appropriations measure (P.L. 108-447) contained similar provisions. In February 2005, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice determined that the Indonesian government and armed forces had cooperated with the FBI's investigation into the Papua murders, thereby satisfying legislative conditions, and certified the resumption of full IMET for Indonesia. The foreign aid appropriations act for FY2006 (P.L. 109-102) continued existing restrictions on FMF to Indonesia; however, the law provided that the Secretary of State may waive restrictions if such action would be in the national security interests of the United States. In November 2005, the Secretary of State exercised the waiver authority and allowed FMF for Indonesia. Top Donors of Bilateral The Consolidated Appropriations Act for Official Development FY2008, Section 679(a) appropriated up to Assistance ($US million) to $15.7 million in Foreign Military Financing Indonesia (FMF) for Indonesia, of which $2.7 million "may not be made available" unless the Government of 1. Japan: 963 2. Germany: 191 Indonesia has taken steps to prosecute and punish 3. United States: 163 members of the TNI credibly alleged to have 4. Australia: 145 committed human rights violations in East Timor 5. Netherlands: 128 and elsewhere, implement reforms related to 24 Notwithstanding the restrictions on IMET and FMF, from 1997-2004, Congress allowed Indonesia to participate in Expanded International Military Education and Training (E- IMET), which emphasizes and teaches human rights, military codes of conduct, and civilian control of the military; the FY2005 foreign operations appropriations measure (P.L. 108- 447) allowed FMF to the Indonesian navy to enhance maritime security. CRS-20 improved transparency and accountability of the military, and allow public access to Papua. 2004 Tsunami Relief. The December 26, 2004 tsunami caused catastrophic losses of lives and property in Aceh province, Indonesia, with nearly 130,000 persons dead and over 500,000 displaced.25 The Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for Defense, the Global War on Terror, and Tsunami Relief, 2005 (P.L. 109-13) appropriated $631 million for tsunami recovery and reconstruction in East and South Asia. Of this amount, the Bush Administration pledged $400 million for relief and reconstruction efforts in Indonesia.26 Laos Table 7. U.S. Assistance to Laos (LPDR), 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 0 0 1,000 992 1,000 DA 0 0 0 0 250 ESF 0 0 375 298 -- IMET 0 0 40 67 100 INCLE 1,984 990 900 1,567 1,000 NADR 2,500 3,300 2,550 2,953 1,900 Totals 4,484 4,290 4,865 5,877 4,250 Food Aid FFEa 0 289 290 -- -- Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID (Congressional Notification, August 14, 2008); U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. The bulk of U.S. aid programs in Laos Top Donors of Bilateral are related to peace and security. The Official Development Administration's request for FY2008 includes Assistance ($US million) to the following programs: removing unexploded Laos ordnance (UXO), English language training for Lao defense officials, counter-narcotics 1. Japan: 65 efforts, and combating transnational crime. 2. France: 21 Other program areas include public health, 3. Sweden: 19 rule of law, and improving the country's trade 4. Germany: 15 5. Australia: 12 and investment environment. Laos also receives assistance through the Leahy War 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD 25 USAID, Fact Sheet #39, Indian Ocean -- Earthquakes and Tsunamis (July 7, 2005). 26 USAID, USAID Rebuilds Lives after the Tsunami (April 27, 2006). CRS-21 Victims Fund ($1.5 million during the 2004-2009 period) to assist victims of UXO. U.S. mines from the Vietnam War cause an average of 120 deaths per year (nearly 4,000 deaths, and over 13,000 casualties, since 1975). UXO also takes a significant economic toll on rural areas, affecting 25% of villages or one-third to one-half of the nation's land area. In October 2005, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Michael Leavitt signed a cooperation agreement with Lao officials in which the United States pledged $3.4 million to Laos for controlling outbreaks of avian flu. Malaysia Table 8. U.S. Assistance to Malaysia, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request IMET 1,100 891 871 876 750 INCLE 0 0 0 0 400 NADR 2,308 1,526 2,401 1,998 1,540 Totals 3,408 2,417 3,272 2,874 2,690 Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID. Malaysia is not a recipient of U.S. development and economic aid. The U.S. State Top Donors of Bilateral Department describes Malaysia as a "key Official Development Muslim-majority state in Southeast Asia and an Assistance ($US million) to important contributor to conflict resolution and Malaysia p e a c e k e e p i n g b o t h r e gi o n a l l y a n d internationally." 27 Regional terrorist 1. Japan: 297 2. Denmark: 14 organizations, most notably Jemaah Islamiyah, 3. Germany: 8 are known to use Malaysia for planning and fund 4. France: 4 raising. Over half of U.S. assistance to the 5. United States: 2 country is related to antiterrorism and non- proliferation activities. Other assistance is 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD provided for military operations and law enforcement restructuring. The U.S. State Department's 2007 Trafficking in Persons Report placed Malaysia in the "Tier 3" category for failing to "make significant efforts to bring itself into compliance with the minimum standards for the elimination of trafficking in persons." Such an assessment could trigger the withholding of non-humanitarian, non-trade-related U.S. foreign assistance. 27 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY2008. CRS-22 Mongolia Table 9. U.S. Assistance to Mongolia, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request DA 0 0 0 4,577 0 ESF 9,920 7,425 6,625 0 6,800 FMF 992 2,970 3,791 993 2,000 IMET 1,009 866 955 923 970 INCLE 0 0 0 0 420 NADR 0 0 0 0 250 Peace Corps 1,694 1,747 1,694 1,995 -- Totals 13,615 13,008 13,065 8,488 10,440 Food Aid FFPa 3,658 5,375 0 -- -- Section 416(b)a 0 0 0 -- -- Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID; U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. U.S. assistance efforts in Mongolia aim to build foundations for the country's private Top Donors of Bilateral economic and democratic political Official Development development. Security assistance focuses on Assistance ($US million) to reform of the Mongolian armed forces and Mongolia regional stability. In September 2005, the government of Mongolia submitted a proposal 1. Japan: 67 2. Germany: 28 to the Millennium Challenge Corporation for 3. United States: 22 several projects to be funded by MCA funds, 4. Netherlands: 9 including railroad construction, improved 5. Turkey: 8 housing, and health services. In October 2007, the Mongolian government and the Millennium 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD Challenge Corporation (MCC) signed a five- year, $285 million agreement. CRS-23 Philippines Table 10. U.S. Assistance to Philippines, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 27,050 24,651 24,362 24,967 20,043 DA 27,576 24,212 15,448 27,321 56,703 ESF 30,720 24,750 29,750 27,773 -- FMF 29,760 29,700 39,700 29,757 15,000 IMET 2,915 2,926 2,746 1,475 1,700 INCLE 3,968 1,980 1,900 794 1,150 NADR 2,257 4,968 4,198 4,531 4,625 Peace Corps 2,820 2,767 2,820 2,753 -- Totals 127,066 115,954 120,924 119,371 99,221 Food Aid P.L. 480 Title I 20,000 0 0 0 0 USDA Loana FFPb 1,720 6,335 3,655 -- -- Section 416(b)b 5,644 0 0 -- -- Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID; U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. b. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. The United States shares important security, political, and commercial interests with the Philippines, a Major Non-NATO Ally and front-line state in the global war on terrorism. Since 2001, the Philippines has received the most dramatic increases in U.S. foreign assistance in the EAP region. The main goals of U.S. assistance in the Philippines are: fighting terrorism through military means and education; supporting the peace process in Muslim Mindanao; improving governance; promoting economic reform and encouraging foreign investment; preserving the environment; and reversing the deterioration of the educational system. The largest U.S. aid accounts in the country fund health and education programs, especially in conflict-affected areas of Mindanao. Other large funding priorities are economic growth and security. Security programs include support for Philippine Defense Reform, joint m i l i t a r y e x e r c i s e s , a n d enhanced Top Donors of Bilateral counterterrorism capabilities. U.S. assistance Official Development also supports the battle against transnational Assistance ($US million) to the Philippines crime (money laundering, trafficking in persons, and narcotics trade). 1. Japan: 706 2. United States: 114 In 2006, the MCC designated the 3. Germany: 60 Philippines as a "threshold" country or close to 4. Australia: 38 meeting MCA criteria and eligible for 5. EC: 20 assistance in qualifying. The Philippines 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD recently initiated a two-year, $21 million MCA CRS-24 threshold program that focuses on fighting corruption and improving government revenue collection. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2008, Section 699E provided up to $30 million for FMF for the Philippines, of which $2 million may be made available after the Secretary of State reports that: ! the Philippine government is implementing the recommendations of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions; ! the Philippine government is implementing a policy of promoting military personnel who demonstrate professionalism and respect for human rights, and is investigating and prosecuting military personnel and others who have been credibly alleged to have committed extrajudicial executions or other violations of human rights; and ! the Philippine military is not engaging in acts of intimidation or violence against members of legal organizations who advocate for human rights. The United States signed a Tropical Forest Conservation Act Agreement with the Philippines on September 19, 2002.28 This accord cancels a portion of the Philippines' debt to the United States. The money saved by this rescheduling -- estimated at about $8 million -- is to be used for forest conservation activities over a period of 14 years. Thailand Table 11. U.S. Assistance to Thailand, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 0 0 1,400 992 1,000 DA 0 0 0 0 4,500 ESF 992 990 990 0 0 FMF 1,488 1,485 0 149 800 IMET 2,526 2,369 0 1,142 1,400 INCLE 1,608 990 900 1,686 1,400 NADR 1,782 3,989 2,100 2,483 2,000 Peace Corps 2,143 2,212 2,144 2,278 -- Totals 10,539 12,035 7,534 8,730 11,100 Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID. 28 The Tropical Forest Conservation Act (P.L. 105-214). CRS-25 Thailand is one of five U.S. treaty allies in Asia and was designated a Major Non-NATO Ally in 2003. Thailand has sent troops to both Afghanistan and Iraq and has aggressively pursued terrorist cells in its southern provinces. For FY2008, the Bush Administration proposed funding for domestic counterterrorism activities, border security, countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and military reform. Thailand would also receive funding for HIV/AIDS programs. September 2006 Military Coup and U.S. Aid Sanctions. In response to the September 19, 2006, military coup in Thailand, the U.S. State Department announced the suspension of nearly $24 million in U.S. foreign assistance to the country, including military and peacekeeping assistance and training under foreign operations appropriations ($7.5 million) and counterterrorism assistance under Section 1206 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2006 ($16.3 million).29 The bans were imposed pursuant to Section 508 of the Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, which provides that such funds shall not be made available to any country whose duly elected head of government was deposed by a military coup. Under Section 508, the funds can be reinstated once a democratically-elected government is in place. Other aid programs not affected by Section 508 or in the U.S. national interest would continue to receive funding. In February 2008, the United States resumed security and military assistance to Thailand following the holding of democratic elections. Other Programs. In 2001, the United States and Thailand signed an Top Donors of Bilateral agreement pursuant to the Tropical Forest Official Development Conservation Act (P.L. 105-214), providing Assistance ($US million) to $11 million in debt relief to Thailand. In Thailand return, Thailand is to contribute $9.5 million over 28 years toward the protection of its 1. Japan: 765 2. Germany: 31 mangrove forests. The United States 3. France: 27 government pledged $5.3 million in relief 4. EC: 19 and reconstruction assistance for areas in 5. Denmark Thailand affected by the December 2004 tsunami. 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD 29 For further information, see CRS Report RL32593, Thailand: Background and U.S. Relations, by Emma Chanlett-Avery. CRS-26 Vietnam Table 12. U.S. Assistance to Vietnam, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 1,200 0 0 0 0 DA 4,750 3,818 2,480 2,420 10,700 ESF 0 1,980 1,980 10,613 -- FMF 0 0 0 0 500 GHAI 24,044 31,214 62,935 86,000 86,000 IMET 50 49 279 186 195 INCLE 0 0 0 0 200 NADR 3,331 3,770 3,200 3,075 1,920 Totals 33,375 40,831 70,874 102,294 99,515 Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID (Congressional Notification, August 14, 2008); U.S. Department of Agriculture. Vietnam, with over 250,000 HIV- positive persons in 2006, is the largest Asian Top Donors of Bilateral recipient of Global HIV/AIDS Initiative Official Development (GHAI) funds under the President's Assistance ($US million) to Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Vietnam Other U.S. assistance objectives in Vietnam include the following: accelerating 1. Japan: 670 2. France: 116 Vietnam's transition to an open and market- 3. United Kingdom: 82 based economy; de-mining; promoting 4. Germany: 79 human rights and supporting civil society; 5. Denmark: 73 and countering illegal cross-border transport of arms and narcotics. IMET programs 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD include training in English language and international peacekeeping. The Vietnam Human Rights Act of 2007 (H.R. 3096), passed by the House on September 18, 2007, would freeze U.S. nonhumanitarian assistance to the government of Vietnam at FY2007 levels unless the President certifies to Congress that the government of Vietnam has made substantial progress in the following areas: the release of political and religious prisoners; religious freedom; the rights of ethnic minorities; access to U.S. refugee programs by Vietnamese nationals; and combating trafficking in persons. CRS-27 South Asia Key U.S. foreign aid objectives in South Asia include combating terrorism, developing bilateral military ties, and reducing the social and economic sources of political instability and extremist religious and political thinking. These causes include lack of accountable governance, inter-ethnic conflict, poverty, disease, and illiteracy. Prior to September 2001, South Asia was the smallest regional recipient of U.S. non-food assistance. Since the war on terrorism began, counterterrorism and related funding for South Asia, especially Afghanistan and Pakistan, have made the region a relatively large recipient of humanitarian, development, and economic assistance and the second-largest beneficiary of military assistance after the Middle East. Before 2002, India and Bangladesh were the largest recipients of U.S. bilateral aid in South Asia. Following Pakistan's participation in Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) in Afghanistan, the country became the largest beneficiary of U.S. foreign assistance in the region after Afghanistan, followed by India. See Figure 7. Figure 7. U.S. Assistance to South Asian Countries (excluding Food Aid), 2001-2008 ($million) Note: 2008 data is estimated. Regional programs focus upon economic growth, combating terrorism, and fighting international crime. The South Asia Regional Fund ($5 million in FY2007) promotes economic growth through addressing energy needs in South Asia, such as assisting countries to find energy resources and facilitating trade in energy. The South and Central Asia Regional Fund ($1.5 million in FY2007) supports programs related to border control and education. The aim of assistance for education is to help reduce religious and ideological extremism and regional instability. Foreign Aid Restrictions. Both India and Pakistan faced sanctions on non- humanitarian aid for conducting nuclear weapons tests in 1998. The United States imposed additional restrictions on aid to Pakistan because of its delinquency on foreign loan payments and because of the military coup that took place in October CRS-28 1999. Many of the nuclear test-related sanctions were lifted soon after they were imposed, and the United States reportedly was prepared to normalize relations with India in the first half of 2001. On September 22, 2001, President Bush issued a final determination removing all nuclear test-related sanctions against India and Pakistan pursuant to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act, 2000 (P.L. 106-79). On October 27, 2001, the President signed S. 1465 into law (P.L. 107-57), exempting Pakistan from coup-related sanctions through FY2002, providing waiver authority on the sanctions through FY2003, and granting an exemption from foreign aid prohibitions related to the country's loan defaults. In subsequent years, Congress has extended the waiver authority on coup-related sanctions. Since 2003, President Bush has annually exercised the waiver authority. A crucial challenge for the United States, according to some U.S. leaders, is how to assist Pakistan in its counterterrorism activities and reward its cooperation in Operation Enduring Freedom while still applying pressure regarding democratization, nuclear non-proliferation, and other U.S. foreign policy imperatives. Disaster Assistance. In the December 2004 earthquake and tsunami, Sri Lanka suffered heavy human losses and property damage. The United States government pledged $134 million in disaster assistance (including USAID disaster assistance and food aid and USDA food aid) to Sri Lanka and $17.9 million to India.30 On October 8, 2005, a catastrophic, magnitude 7.6 earthquake struck Pakistan, killing over 73,000 persons in Pakistan and 1,333 in India and leaving nearly 3 million people homeless. The United States pledged $300 million in economic assistance to the affected region.31 Country Aid Levels and Restrictions -- South Asia Bangladesh Table 13. U.S. Assistance to Bangladesh, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 33,412 31,509 29,935 37,181 29,575 DA 16,535 10,889 10,430 29,190 39,060 ESF 4,960 4,950 3,750 0 0 FMF 248 990 990 595 1,000 IMET 1,035 930 934 761 800 INCLE 0 0 0 198 800 30 USAID, Fact Sheet no. 39, Indian Ocean -- Earthquake and Tsunamis (July 7, 2005); USAID, Tsunami Assistance, One Year Later (December 21, 2005). 31 USAID, Fact Sheet no. 44, South Asia -- Earthquake (August 25, 2006). CRS-29 FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request NADR 893 5,094 2,575 6,301 3,600 Peace Corps 1,773 706 0 0 -- Totals 58,856 55,068 48,614 74,226 74,835 Food Aid P.L. 480 Title 22,122 30,207 35,618 30,783 32,000 II Granta Section 3,257 3,833 5,379 -- -- 416(b)b FFEb 0 2,868 0 -- -- Sources: U.S. Department of State, USAID, U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. b. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. In addition to problems related to development, corruption remains a key obstacle to social, economic, and political advancement in Bangladesh. The largest elements of the U.S. aid presence involve public health, including HIV/AIDS programs, and basic education. In other areas, the U.S. government provides support for anti-corruption reforms and democratic institutions. U.S. assistance also aims to expand economic opportunities and equitable growth in the country. Security and military assistance help to strengthen the police and military forces to counter terrorist activity, enhance border security, and fight international financial and drug crimes. In March 2006, the Peace Corps suspended its programs in Bangladesh due to Top Donors of Bilateral concerns that volunteers might become Official Development targets of terrorists. Assistance ($US million) to Bangladesh In 2000, the United States signed an agreement with Bangladesh reducing the 1. Japan: 234 2. United Kingdom: 232 country's debt payments to the United States 3. United States: 89 by $10 million over 18 years. In return, 4. EC: 68 Bangladesh is to set aside $8.5 million to 5. Netherlands: 63 endow a Tropical Forest Fund to protect and conserve its mangrove forests.32 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD 32 Pursuant to the Tropical Forest Conservation Act (P.L. 105-214). CRS-30 India Table 14. U.S. Assistance to India, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 53,222 52,815 53,411 58,947 59,682 DA 24,856 19,700 15,676 10,547 900 ESF 14,880 4,950 4,875 0 -- GHAI 0 0 8,971 -- -- IMET 1,502 1,272 1,501 1,237 1,200 INCLE 0 0 0 0 400 NADR 4,181 2,711 1,108 2,684 1,700 Totals 98,641 81,448 85,542 73,415 63,882 Food Aid P.L. 480 Title II 35,763 43,501 31,034 13,406 13,500 Granta Sources: U.S. Department of State, USAID, U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. The United States significantly increased bilateral aid to India in FY2002 Top Donors of Bilateral and FY2003, largely as part of its Official Development counterterrorism efforts in the region. The Assistance ($US million) to current aid program aims to further Indian India economic development in order to enhance the country's rise as "an influential U.S. 1. Japan: 651 2. United Kingdom: 535 partner in the international system."33 3. Germany: 166 Furthermore, U.S. assistance serves the 4. EC: 164 poorest segments of the population in order 5. United States: 164 to mitigate economic and social conditions that may give rise to political extremism. 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD For FY2008, the largest portion of U.S. assistance to India funds public health and HIV/AIDS care, treatment, and prevention. Security and military assistance supports programs related to military professionalism, counterterrorism, counternarcotics, and border security. Economic Support Funds are to promote the private agricultural sector. 33 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY2008. CRS-31 Nepal Table 15. U.S. Assistance to Nepal, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 25,165 18,613 18,090 19,891 13,667 DA 10,000 8,393 10,447 9,136 -- ESF 4,960 4,950 11,250 9,423 13,015 IMET 648 644 793 752 800 INCLE 0 0 0 30 10,000 NADR 2,771 0 840 1,141 700 Peace Corps 179 0 0 0 -- Totals 43,723 32,600 41,420 40,373 38,182 Food Aid P.L. 480 Title II 966 1,213 6,056 0 0 Granta FFEb 3,871 0 0 -- -- Sources: U.S. Department of State, USAID, U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. b. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. U.S. assistance to Nepal aims to further the peace process between the government of Top Donors of Bilateral Nepal and Maoist insurgents, establish Official Development stability, and promote development. IMET, Assistance ($US million) to INCLE, and NADR programs help the Nepal Nepal military and police to restore law and order. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for 1. Japan: 76 2. United Kingdom: 64 FY2008 allows for only Expanded 3. Germany: 58 International Military Education and Training 4. United States: 45 (E-IMET) for Nepal. E-IMET emphasizes 5. Denmark: 31 and teaches the military about human rights, military codes of conduct, and civilian control 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD of the military. Other major components of United States aid programs in Nepal include building the capacity of local and national governments to provide social services and improving public health. In 2004, the United States suspended the Peace Corps program in Nepal after Maoist rebels bombed the United States Information Center in Kathmandu. CRS-32 Pakistan Table 16. U.S. Assistance to Pakistan, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 21,000 22,757 22,385 29,816 27,855 DA 29,000 26,990 95,327 29,757 -- ESF 297,600 296,595 283,673 347,165 603,200d FMF 298,800 297,000 297,000 297,570 300,000 IMET 1,885 2,037 1,992 2,103 1,950 INCLE 32,150 34,970 24,000 21,822 32,000 NADR 7,951 8,585 9,977 9,725 11,250 Totalsa 688,386 688,934 734,354 737,958 976,255 Food Aid P.L. 480 Title II 0 17,675 0 0 0 Grantb FFPc 10,170 11,197 0 -- -- FFEc 5,796 5,169 0 -- -- c Section 416(b) 1,972 0 276 -- -- Sources: U.S. Department of State; USAID (Congressional Notification, August 21, 2008); U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. Totals include supplemental appropriations. b. USAID data -- includes freight costs. c. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. d. Includes a "bridge fund" appropriation of $150 million: P.L. 110-252, Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2008 (supplemental appropriations for FY2008 and FY2009). Pakistan is a front-line state in the global war on terrorism. Most U.S. assistance programs Top Donors of Bilateral in the country claim to directly or indirectly serve Official Development U.S. counterterrorism goals. The United States Assistance ($US million): government has pledged $600 million in Pakistan economic and security assistance and $50 million in earthquake reconstruction aid on an annual 1. United States: 224 2. Japan: 120 basis through FY2009. Approximately 43% of 3. United Kingdom: 92 U.S. assistance to Pakistan supports 4. Turkey: 63 counterterrorism and border security efforts. The 5. Norway: 45 second largest strategic objective (36% of funding) is economic growth, aimed at nurturing 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD a middle class as a foundation for democracy. Economic Support Funds (13%) "help Pakistan to improve the quality of and access to public education, primary healthcare, and water and sanitation services" in part to help provide alternatives to services provided by terrorist-linked charities and CRS-33 schools.34 Other assistance directly promotes democracy through support of legislative processes, democratic practices within political parties, free and fair elections, civil society, and the mass media. Lifting of Foreign Aid Restrictions. Pakistan received limited U.S. assistance during the 1990s -- counter-narcotics support, food aid, and Pakistan NGO Initiative programs -- due to congressional restrictions in response to Pakistan's nuclear weapons program.35 In 1985, the Pressler amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (Section 620E(e)) barred U.S. foreign assistance to Pakistan unless the President determined that Pakistan did not possess nuclear weapons and that U.S. assistance would reduce the risk of Pakistan's obtaining them. In 1990, President George H. W. Bush declined to make such determinations, thus triggering Pressler amendment sanctions against Pakistan. This restriction was eased in 1995 to prohibit only military assistance.36 In 1998, following nuclear weapons tests carried out by India and Pakistan, President Clinton imposed restrictions on non-humanitarian aid to both countries pursuant to the Arms Export Control Act (Section 102, the Glenn amendment). Furthermore, Pakistan became ineligible for most forms of U.S. foreign assistance due to its delinquency in servicing its debt to the United States and to a 1999 military coup.37 Following the September 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Pakistan was designated as a front-line state in the war on terrorism and received dramatically increased U.S. aid levels. In late September 2001, Congress enacted and the President exercised waivers to nuclear weapons sanctions that had prohibited military and economic aid to India and Pakistan. The Bush Administration rescheduled $379 million of Pakistan's $2.7 billion debt to the United States so that Pakistan would not be considered in arrears, a requirement for further foreign assistance. The President also made $100 million in ESF available before the various sanctions were eased or lifted, exercising authority afforded him under Section 614 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961. On October 27, 2001, President Bush signed S. 1465 into law (P.L. 107-57), allowing the United States government to waive sanctions related to the military coup and authorizing presidential waiver authority through 2003, provided the President determined that making foreign assistance available would facilitate democratization and help the United States in its battle against international terrorism. P.L. 107-57 also exempted Pakistan from foreign assistance restrictions related to its default on international loans.38 34 Congressional Budget Justification for Foreign Operations, FY2008. 35 The USAID Pakistan NGO Initiative delivered education and health services primarily through the Asia Foundation and Aga Khan Foundation USA and independent of the government of Pakistan. Total funding for the program (1994-2003) was $10 million. 36 The Brown amendment to the Foreign Assistance Act eased the prohibition to military assistance only. 37 The annual Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, usually at Section 508, denies foreign assistance to any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree. 38 See P.L. 107-57, Sections 1(b) and 3(2). CRS-34 Since 2003, President Bush has annually exercised the waiver authority on coup- related sanctions against Pakistan.39 On March 25, 2008, President Bush waived democracy-related aid sanctions on Pakistan for FY2008, stating that such a waiver would facilitate the transition to democratic rule in Pakistan and was important to U.S. counterterrorism efforts. Following the national and provincial elections of February 2008, which many observers considered free, fair, and credible, the Bush Administration issued an April 2008 determination that a democratically elected government had been restored in Islamabad after a 101-month hiatus. This determination permanently removed coup-related aid sanctions.40 Sri Lanka Table 17. U.S. Assistance to Sri Lanka, 2005-2009 (thousands of dollars) FY2008 FY2009 Account FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 estimate request CSH 300 0 0 0 0 DA 6,774 3,705 3,557 5,241 4,000 ESF 9,920 3,960 3,000 0 -- FMF 496 990 990 422 900 IMET 461 529 483 571 600 INCLE 0 0 0 20 350 NADR 2,700 3,615 1,050 1,143 650 Totals 20,651 12,799 9,080 7,397 6,500 Food Aid/Disaster Assistance P.L. 480 Title 1,996 0 14,086 0 0 II Granta FFPb 9,690 8,798 4,600 -- -- Section 0 70 0 -- -- 416(b)b Tsunami 134,600 -- -- -- -- Reliefc Sources: U.S. Department of State, USAID, U.S. Department of Agriculture. a. USAID data -- includes freight costs. b. USDA data -- does not include freight costs. c. Tsunami Recovery and Reconstruction Fund, P.L. 109-13 39 For additional information on aid, including U.S. Department of Defense programs in Pakistan, see CRS Report RL33498, Pakistan-U.S. Relations, by K. Alan Kronstadt. 40 Federal Register Vol. 73, no. 69, p. 19276-19277, April 9, 2008. "Pakistan Poll Process `Credible' -- U.S. Senators," BBC Monitoring South Asia, February 20, 2008. CRS-35 United States assistance programs aim to promote the peace process between the Top Donors of Bilateral government of Sri Lanka and Tamil separatists Official Development led by the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam Assistance ($US million) to (LTTE). In order to help pressure the LTTE to Sri Lanka return to the negotiating table, the United States provides assistance to help strengthen the 1. Japan: 317 2. Germany: 65 capabilities of the Sri Lankan military. INCLE 3. Norway: 48 and NADR programs support the police force 4. United States: 43 and counterterrorism activities. U.S. assistance 5. Netherlands: 38 also promotes economic growth, especially in less developed, conflict-ridden areas, and helps 2004-2005 average. Source: OECD to advance democracy, human rights, and civil society. In 2004, Sri Lanka met eligibility requirements for MCA funding, due in large part to positive governmental, social, and economic indicators in Western provinces. Although a Compact was expected in 2007, the MCC put an agreement on hold in early 2007 pending improvements in the overall human rights and security situations, and in December 2007 the MCC decided not to reselect Sri Lanka for 2008 Compact eligibility. Sri Lanka suffered heavy human losses (an estimated 31,000 dead, 4,100 missing, and 519,000 displaced) and property damage worth approximately $1 billion (or 4.4% of GDP) in the December 2004 earthquake and tsunami.41 The Bush Administration pledged $134.6 million for disaster relief and reconstruction to Sri Lanka. In 2006, Sri Lanka received Transition Initiative (TI) funding ($1.7 million) for the peace process and $1.1 million in disaster assistance. FY2008 Appropriations. The Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2008, Section 699G, withheld FMF from Sri Lanka, with the exception of technology or equipment related to maritime and air surveillance and communications, unless the following conditions were met: ! the Sri Lankan military is suspending and the Sri Lankan government is bringing to justice members of the military who have been credibly alleged to have committed gross violations of human rights or international humanitarian law, including complicity in the recruitment of child soldiers; ! the Sri Lankan government is providing access to humanitarian organizations and journalists throughout the country consistent with international humanitarian law; and ! the Sri Lankan government has agreed to the establishment of a field presence of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in Sri Lanka with sufficient staff and mandate to 41 USAID, Fact Sheet no. 39, Indian Ocean -- Earthquake and Tsunamis, July 7, 2005. CRS-36 conduct full and unfettered monitoring throughout the country and to publicize its findings. CRS-37 Appendix. Selected Acronyms for U.S. Foreign Aid Accounts and Programs CSD: Child Survival and Disease CSH: Child Survival and Health (replaces CSD) DA: Development Assistance DF: Democracy Funds EAP: East Asia and the Pacific EDA: Excess Defense Articles ERMA: Emergency Migration and Refugee Assistance ESF: Economic Support Funds FFP: Food for Progress FFE: Food for Education FMF: Foreign Military Financing GHAI: Global HIV/AIDS Initiative IMET: International Military Education and Training INCLE: International Narcotics Control and Law Enforcement MCA: Millennium Challenge Account MCC: Millennium Challenge Corporation MRA: Migration and Refugee Assistance NADR: Non-proliferation, Anti-terrorism, De-mining, and Related Programs OECD: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development OFDA: Office of Foreign Disaster Assistance PKO: Peace-keeping Operations P.L. 480 Title I: Food Aid (USDA loans) P.L. 480 Title II: USAID emergency food program Section 416(b): Surplus Food Commodities USAID: United States Agency for International Development USDA: United States Department of Agriculture ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ For other versions of this document, see http://wikileaks.org/wiki/CRS-RL31362